California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Ferro, 21 Cal.App.4th 1, 25 Cal.Rptr.2d 747 (Cal. App. 1993):
The question is whether the above means the trial court made a prima facie finding of systematic exclusion. If it did, the conviction must be reversed. "Once a prima facie case has been shown, the burden shifts to the prosecutor to show that the jurors in question were legitimately excused. [Citations.]" (People v. Gonzalez (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 1186, 1192, 259 Cal.Rptr. 870.) Here, the prosecutor offered no justification for the peremptory challenges, but addressed only the question of whether a prima facie showing had been made.
"In the absence of an express prima facie finding, reviewing courts have implied this initial finding through the actions of the trial court." (People v. Gonzalez, supra, 211 Cal.App.3d at p. 1196, 259 Cal.Rptr. 870.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.